Dismissed

Hanuman Prasad S/O Trilok Chand v. Principal Secretary, Department of Local Self Govt.

Rajasthan HC5 Apr 2022SAW/409/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Leave Petitioner appealed against dismissal of a writ petition seeking allotment of an alternative plot by the Municipal Board. The High Court found no statutory right to grant such direction and dismissed the appeal, though leaving the appellant free to seek indulgence from the authority.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as the Court found no statutory basis to issue a mandamus for allotment of an alternative plot.

Hanuman Prasad S/O Trilok Chand Vs Principal Secretary… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 409/2022

¶3

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5791/2021

¶5

Hanuman Prasad S/o Trilok Chand, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Mohalla Bawri Ka Chowk, Uniara District Tonk Rajasthan.

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Principal Secretary, Department of Local Self Govt., Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Uniara, District Tonk, Rajasthan.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Aradhana Swami, Advocate

¶12

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Judgment / Order

05/04/2022

Heard.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the writ petition has been dismissed.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the appellant is sufferer since long as he had participated in the auction proceedings for allotment of plot and also deposited 1/4th of the amount but remaining amount was not accepted, nor allotment had taken place. It is next submitted that even though in the earlier round allotment was not granted to the appellant,

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[SAW-409/2022]

¶20

taking into consideration that the dispute in respect of the allotment of the said plot was pending in the Trial Court, with passage of time, the appellant decided to claim an alternative plot, but no relief was granted by the local authority and therefore, the writ petition was filed before this Court seeking relief for allotment of alternative plot which has also been dismissed without due consideration.

¶21

We find that in the matter of claim of the appellant with regard to the allotment of the plot on the basis of auction in respect of which the appellant claim to be a successful bidder and deposited 1/4th of the bid amount, the matter was taken to this Court and the writ petition was dismissed by learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 07.08.1998 with the observation that no direction for delivery of possession can be given. Taking note of pendency of the application, this Court gave liberty to the appellant to seek alternative remedy available to him under the law claiming possession over the disputed plots. Writ appeal was also dismissed.

¶22

While matter stood thus, the appellant started to be claiming allotment of an alternative plot for which certain representation were made. As no alternative plot was allotted, again writ petition was filed, which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

¶23

It appears that the appellant had been earlier contesting in various fora seeking allotment of plot in his favour but that having not done, the appellant has started raising claim of an alternative plot for which purpose another writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5791/2021 was filed, wherein, the impugned order has been passed.

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[SAW-409/2022]

¶26

In the absence of there being any statutory obligation or a corresponding right created in favour of the appellant under the relevant rules regulating allotment of plot by respondent-Municipal Board, we are afraid, no mandamus can be issued by this Court to consider appellant’s case for allotment of an alternative plot. Therefore, the relief cannot be granted and the petition has rightly been dismissed. We do not find any merit in this appeal, therefore this appeal is accordingly dismissed.

¶27

We hasten to clarify here that dismissal of this appeal shall not come in the way of the appellant seeking indulgence of respondent-Municipal Board for allotment of any alternative plot.

¶28

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶29

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ

¶30

Mohita /2

Hanuman Prasad S/O Trilok Chand v. Principal Secretary, Department of Local Self Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Prasad S/O Trilok Chand v. Principal Secretary, Department of Local Self Govt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaipur Development Authority Vs Sumitra Devi W/O Late Shri Kishan Singh

Surajmal Moga S/O Shri Parasaram Vs the State of Rajasthan

The State of Rajasthan Vs Parmeshwar Meena S/O Amba Lal Meena

Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh Son of Shri Ratan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Khilari Son of Shri Arjun Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Dinesh Kumar Jakhar S/O Hawa Singh Singh Jakhar